<nettime> lawyers, guns, and money digest [skoric vs. frodeaux]

["nettime's_clerk" <nettime@bbs.thing.net>]

Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money?
     "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>
     FrodeauxB@aol.com
     "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>
     FrodeauxB@aol.com
     "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>
     FrodeauxB@aol.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:42:32 -0400
Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money?

Both Bushes - H & W were at Yale law school, I believe. I don't 
know whether the junior graduated, though, or got his degree 
'honorably'.

I agree that there is the 'man behind the curtain' and that 'lawyers' 
are just 'devil advocates'. The situation is, however, that the 'man 
behind the curtain' is, obviously, elusive. He tricks us into believing 
that he does not exist. Pleads fifth amandement (in the U.S.) or 
article six (in Ireland) or whatever - while he pushes his advocates 
to the front line.

I basically wanted to draw a parallel between the now defunct 
Eastern bloc communist system (example: Yugoslavia) and the 
very much alive Western bloc capitalist one (example: USA). My 
feeling is that lawyers in the later system serve the same role of 
being the connective tissue of the system, that the communist 
party members were in the former system. I don't think that 
lawyers per se are bad people because of that. Some of them are 
actually very good people and my very good friends - just as in 
former Yugoslavia there were members of the communist party that 
were honest, intelligent, hardworking and humorous, that wanted to 
make things better for everybody. They failed, though. And the 
'man behind the curtain' had the best of them.

And now many of the people in former Yugoslavia, particularly in 
Serbia, are blaming the 'man behind the curtain', or, rather, the 
'ogre from the tunnel' (Blagojevic's film "Pretty Villages, Pretty 
Flames") for their ill-fortune. But the man is so elusive - because he 
lives inside us. Inside each one of us - lawyers and/or party 
members just have more responsibility how they will respond to his 
urges, because their collective actions can affect the given 
societies much more than actions of the rest of us.

Best Regards,
ivo


Ivo Skoric
1773 Lexington Ave
New York NY 10029
212.369.9197
ivo@balkansnet.org
http://balkansnet.org

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: FrodeauxB@aol.com
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:29:25 EDT
Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money?

Yes, it is the person, not a profession, which matters. I am most sensitive 
to generalizations about any group, as I am sure you are. It seems to me, 
however, that the only "political incorrectness" we tolerate is that aimed at 
lawyers. It is an honorable profession, as are many. Some practitioners do 
not treat it as such. 
I must also wonder if your analogy is fair. Of course, you have had the 
benefit (?) of knowing both systems, so I am sure it is not incorrect, 
especially for those who serve themselves and not all of us.

Sincerely,

David 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:02:20 -0400
Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money?

My impression, living in the U.S. is that while lawyers are a 
profession, they as a group became more of an establishment 
here. Kind of like the party or the priests once were, a spice 
without which you can't make any corporate dish any more. That of 
course doesn't mean that all of them are bad or crooked - but I see 
an inherent danger in making the entire society so dependent on 
one particular approach. I am not a fan of aristocracy even if it is 
merit based.
ivo

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: FrodeauxB@aol.com
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:38:57 EDT
Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money?

Ivo,
Well, for what it is worth, the rule of law does seem to protect a lot of 
folks in a lot of ways. It is subject to manipulation, but it is the best 
thing going thus far. There are simply some folks who, if they are touched, 
they aren't reached. Read Democracy in America, particularly the section on 
the law and attorneys. I am still idealistic and hopeful, so I go to work 
every day dedicated to my principles and optimistic about this existence. I 
enjoy reading critiques like yours, if for no other reason that they make me 
sit down and think through what I believe. As a Franciscan priest once told 
me, "Cherish the heretics; they test our faith which we often take for 
granted." He also told me to never let anyone or anything come between me and 
God-especially not a priest.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:15:20 -0400
Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money?

"It is the best thing going thus far" was never good enough reason 
for me to be idealistic and hopeful about any particular "thing."
Particularly because this is how many people defended self-
management in Yugoslav socialist system. And I always scorned 
Leibnitz and others belonging to the 'positivist' phylosophical 
concept. I guess, when somebody becomes a 'dissident' before 
reaching US legal drinking age, then he is cursed to be a heretic 
for the rest of his life, questioning validity of every belief and 
practice.

The general purpose of the rule of law is to protect, I agree. But to 
protect whom or what, that's the question I beg to ask. How would 
the state of lawlessness look like? Where nothing and nobody 
would be protected and everybody could do whatever he wanted, 
did you ever thing how would that look like? When I think about 
that, I always start with myself: what would I do? Given that there 
is no laws and no police, the rule of power should prevail, the 
common sense of our education and upbringing would suggest. I 
could, given that I am young and athletic, go around and beat up 
weaker individuals and take what they claim to be their property. I 
could kill them if I chose so. Also, I could be beaten up and killed 
by some gang paid by somebody who has more material resources 
at his/hers disposal. Therefore, it would be benefitial for me to 
accept the beneficial side of the compromise that the rule of law 
offers and demands from its adherents. 

However, I don't think in those terms. I do not have an ambition to 
beat other people, to take their possessions or to kill them. I just 
want to live, have fun and let others live and have fun. I put my 
relations with the nature, the world and the other people in more 
cooperative and less competitive terms. And I don't need a law for 
that. I can manage my relations with others without the written law. 
I am not afraid of others, nor do I threaten anybody. And I could 
defend myself to a certain point, after which I am ready to accept 
the risk of losing my life for the price of greater liberty. That's 
precisely what endeared the American system (as advertised by 
Hollywood, of course) to me, despite my grandmother's nagging 
that the U.S. is 'unsafe' to live in.

I am actually quite disappointed with the U.S. and the proliferation 
of restrictions. What is the purpose of legislation that majority of 
population disobey (like the drinking age and the speed limit, for 
example)? Freedom entails risks. Risks require courage. That's 
what 'land of the free, home of the brave' slogan suggests. 
Excessive legislation curtails freedom, in order to diminish risks. 
The intrinsic risk-aversive quality of the 'rule of law' not only lowers 
the need for individual courage, but also perceives individual 
courage with suspicion and annoyance. Therefore, 'rule of law' as 
practiced today may be inherently dangerous to the lambasted 
ideals of Democracy in America. There is that great song of the old-
school British punk band The Clash with lyrics that go like: "I am 
so bored with the U S A ..."

ivo


Ivo Skoric
1773 Lexington Ave
New York NY 10029
212.369.9197
ivo@balkansnet.org
http://balkansnet.org

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: FrodeauxB@aol.com
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:17:57 EDT
Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money?

When one traffics in the idealistic, one is outside the mainstream. The facts 
of the matter is that relative few believe as you do, and even fewer act that 
way. It is not that simple. To speculate that you would act in a life 
threatening situation in a way which is not self defensive and driven by the 
instinct to survive is just that-speculation. To aspire is necessary-to be 
practical is another. Even now you, I, we, aren't acting so idealistic. The 
key is not to spend the energy speculating or criticizing. The key is to act 
within the framework to change the framework. If one desires to bring about 
meaningful change, one does so by acting the way one believes, and not by 
critiquing others. Honestly, this bit about the drinking age and speed limits 
suppressing freedom is silly. These are not the issues nor do I believe they 
are even a microcosm of the issues. They are diversions, nothing more. What 
you seek is license, not freedom. I guess we must agree to disagree. 
Here is the issue:
Now, if I may paraphrase what you're generally 
saying, the bourgeois mock-heroic shenanigans, as you
call them, of bored rich men floating around the world in 
hot air balloons, of our extreme interest in extreme sports, 
our obsession with face-lifted, liposucked, and tummy-tucked 
celebrities of mediocre talent, our deranged focus on the 
sexual peccadilloes of elected leaders, are all examples of 
the funneling of our will to power into trivial pursuits and 
away from genuine heroism, exemplified by the likes of Julius 
Caesar, Napoleon, and Fred Nietzsche.
Oprah/Nietzsche (James M. Crotty)
http://www.disinfo.com/pages/article/id1548/pg1/

Sincerely,

David A. Hamilton
Attorney at Law
P. O. Box 44202
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
Telephone: 225/387-4982
Fax: 225/346-6360
email: FrodeauxB@aol.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net